FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W1988792014> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W1988792014 endingPage "421" @default.
• W1988792014 startingPage "418" @default.
• W1988792014 abstract "BackgroundThe American Joint Committee on Cancer staging of esophageal cancer has been criticized for not establishing a minimum standard for lymphadenectomy, and for relying on location of nodes involved rather than their number. The objective of this study was to review the current practice of American surgeons with regard to lymph node assessment during esophageal resection.MethodsThe operative and pathology reports of patients who underwent staging by computed tomography and fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography and subsequent resection for esophageal cancer (multiinstitutional American College of Surgeons Oncology Group Z0060 trial) were analyzed.ResultsOne hundred forty-five patients underwent resection. Operative and pathology reports were unavailable in 11 patients. The results of the remaining 134 resections (Ivor-Lewis, n = 64; transhiatal, n = 59; other, n = 11) were reviewed. Overall, 13 ± 9 (mean ± standard deviation) lymph nodes were evaluated per patient. More lymph nodes were evaluated in patients undergoing Ivor-Lewis (15 ± 9) than transhiatal esophagectomy (9 ± 7; p < 0.001). The mean number of distinct lymph node stations analyzed per patient was 3 ± 2. In 38% (51 of 134) of patients the nodes attached to the specimen were evaluated without any distinction among nodal stations. The practice of submitting named packets of nodal material resulted in 16 ± 9 nodes per case, as opposed to the practice of submitting an entire specimen for the pathologists to dissect, which yielded 10 ± 8 nodes (p < 0.001).ConclusionsThere is considerable variability and room to improve in the extent of resection and pathologic evaluation of esophagectomy specimens. A uniform standard for esophageal cancer resection is warranted to improve the precision and value of pathologic staging. The American Joint Committee on Cancer staging of esophageal cancer has been criticized for not establishing a minimum standard for lymphadenectomy, and for relying on location of nodes involved rather than their number. The objective of this study was to review the current practice of American surgeons with regard to lymph node assessment during esophageal resection. The operative and pathology reports of patients who underwent staging by computed tomography and fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography and subsequent resection for esophageal cancer (multiinstitutional American College of Surgeons Oncology Group Z0060 trial) were analyzed. One hundred forty-five patients underwent resection. Operative and pathology reports were unavailable in 11 patients. The results of the remaining 134 resections (Ivor-Lewis, n = 64; transhiatal, n = 59; other, n = 11) were reviewed. Overall, 13 ± 9 (mean ± standard deviation) lymph nodes were evaluated per patient. More lymph nodes were evaluated in patients undergoing Ivor-Lewis (15 ± 9) than transhiatal esophagectomy (9 ± 7; p < 0.001). The mean number of distinct lymph node stations analyzed per patient was 3 ± 2. In 38% (51 of 134) of patients the nodes attached to the specimen were evaluated without any distinction among nodal stations. The practice of submitting named packets of nodal material resulted in 16 ± 9 nodes per case, as opposed to the practice of submitting an entire specimen for the pathologists to dissect, which yielded 10 ± 8 nodes (p < 0.001). There is considerable variability and room to improve in the extent of resection and pathologic evaluation of esophagectomy specimens. A uniform standard for esophageal cancer resection is warranted to improve the precision and value of pathologic staging." @default.
• W1988792014 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W1988792014 creator A5046572144 @default.
• W1988792014 creator A5067380097 @default.
• W1988792014 creator A5069972453 @default.
• W1988792014 creator A5072149523 @default.
• W1988792014 creator A5091063212 @default.
• W1988792014 date "2008-08-01" @default.
• W1988792014 modified "2023-10-18" @default.
• W1988792014 title "Lymph Node Analysis in Esophageal Resection: American College of Surgeons Oncology Group Z0060 Trial" @default.
• W1988792014 cites W1993658448 @default.
• W1988792014 cites W2018528114 @default.
• W1988792014 cites W2048851162 @default.
• W1988792014 cites W2054514004 @default.
• W1988792014 cites W2142536934 @default.
• W1988792014 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2008.04.043" @default.
• W1988792014 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18640307" @default.
• W1988792014 hasPublicationYear "2008" @default.
• W1988792014 type Work @default.
• W1988792014 sameAs 1988792014 @default.
• W1988792014 citedByCount "57" @default.
• W1988792014 countsByYear W19887920142012 @default.
• W1988792014 countsByYear W19887920142013 @default.
• W1988792014 countsByYear W19887920142014 @default.
• W1988792014 countsByYear W19887920142015 @default.
• W1988792014 countsByYear W19887920142016 @default.
• W1988792014 countsByYear W19887920142017 @default.
• W1988792014 countsByYear W19887920142018 @default.
• W1988792014 countsByYear W19887920142019 @default.
• W1988792014 countsByYear W19887920142020 @default.
• W1988792014 countsByYear W19887920142021 @default.
• W1988792014 countsByYear W19887920142022 @default.
• W1988792014 countsByYear W19887920142023 @default.
• W1988792014 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W1988792014 hasAuthorship W1988792014A5046572144 @default.
• W1988792014 hasAuthorship W1988792014A5067380097 @default.
• W1988792014 hasAuthorship W1988792014A5069972453 @default.
• W1988792014 hasAuthorship W1988792014A5072149523 @default.
• W1988792014 hasAuthorship W1988792014A5091063212 @default.
• W1988792014 hasBestOaLocation W19887920141 @default.
• W1988792014 hasConcept C121608353 @default.
• W1988792014 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W1988792014 hasConcept C126838900 @default.
• W1988792014 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W1988792014 hasConcept C142724271 @default.
• W1988792014 hasConcept C2775842073 @default.
• W1988792014 hasConcept C2777297899 @default.
• W1988792014 hasConcept C2779720271 @default.
• W1988792014 hasConcept C2779742542 @default.
• W1988792014 hasConcept C2780824555 @default.
• W1988792014 hasConcept C2780849966 @default.
• W1988792014 hasConcept C61434518 @default.
• W1988792014 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W1988792014 hasConceptScore W1988792014C121608353 @default.
• W1988792014 hasConceptScore W1988792014C126322002 @default.
• W1988792014 hasConceptScore W1988792014C126838900 @default.
• W1988792014 hasConceptScore W1988792014C141071460 @default.
• W1988792014 hasConceptScore W1988792014C142724271 @default.
• W1988792014 hasConceptScore W1988792014C2775842073 @default.
• W1988792014 hasConceptScore W1988792014C2777297899 @default.
• W1988792014 hasConceptScore W1988792014C2779720271 @default.
• W1988792014 hasConceptScore W1988792014C2779742542 @default.
• W1988792014 hasConceptScore W1988792014C2780824555 @default.
• W1988792014 hasConceptScore W1988792014C2780849966 @default.
• W1988792014 hasConceptScore W1988792014C61434518 @default.
• W1988792014 hasConceptScore W1988792014C71924100 @default.
• W1988792014 hasIssue "2" @default.
• W1988792014 hasLocation W19887920141 @default.
• W1988792014 hasLocation W19887920142 @default.
• W1988792014 hasOpenAccess W1988792014 @default.
• W1988792014 hasPrimaryLocation W19887920141 @default.
• W1988792014 hasRelatedWork W2030407014 @default.
• W1988792014 hasRelatedWork W2110409790 @default.
• W1988792014 hasRelatedWork W2111692857 @default.
• W1988792014 hasRelatedWork W2429229169 @default.
• W1988792014 hasRelatedWork W3002509307 @default.
• W1988792014 hasRelatedWork W3028652714 @default.
• W1988792014 hasRelatedWork W3095401347 @default.
• W1988792014 hasRelatedWork W4224327034 @default.
• W1988792014 hasRelatedWork W4285678492 @default.
• W1988792014 hasRelatedWork W4297216175 @default.
• W1988792014 hasVolume "86" @default.
• W1988792014 isParatext "false" @default.
• W1988792014 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W1988792014 magId "1988792014" @default.
• W1988792014 workType "article" @default.